I am echoing a similar post in saying this, but companies are responsible for a large part of colonisation. They acted on behalf of the crown, even if they were legally subordinate.
The following is a legal case that demonstrates this relationship, as well as the concepts of Terra nullius and Rex nullius being weaponised to expropriate land.
In re Southern Rhodesia 1919 AC11
The issue was regarding ownership of ‘unalienated land’ in Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) after territory was conquered by the British South African Company. The territory was ruled by King Lobengula, infringed upon by the Company in 1890. Three years later, conflict broke out between the two groups.
When the matter was brought to court, the existing ownership of the land was seen to be ‘tribal’/‘communal’. The court believed that some tribes do not have concepts of right and duties, or other legal ideas of civilised society. According to them, the gulf between ‘civilised’ Europe and the ‘backwards’ tribes was too large to bridge. For this reason, the indigenous tribes were seen as incapable of owning land - not like the civilised, liberal men of Europe.
With this matter resolved, the court had to decide who owned the land: company, or crown. The case ruled in favour of the crown, but stated that chartered companies may conquer and administer the land on their behalf. Indigenous land systems received no legal protections.
The chartered company believed that they owned the land they took. However, they only possessed it as a subordinate entity to the British Crown. Indigenous rights, ownership, and even existence and full humans were barely considered in this case.
This case is indicative of many attitudes of the time, but there are a few I wish to highlight:
1. The hypocrisy of liberalism: ownership and even general human rights do not extend to those who are not deemed civilised, or even human. Because of this, the land is deemed empty.
2. The entitlement of colonial Europe: because land is ‘empty’, whoever encounters it first (company or crown) is able to incorporate it into their empire.
3. The use of legality to justify colonialism: liberalism will resort to overt violence if needed, but prefers to clean its hands and justify its actions with legality. The prestige of court proceedings create an air of legitimacy.
4. Eurocentrism: belief in European civilisation as opposed to African barbarity. Any system of governance except a European model of liberal democracy is illegitimate.
5. The collaboration of corporation and monarchy: colonisation is an extension of capitalism in its constant drive to acquire more resources and thus profit. Historic colonialism was a collaboration between the old aristocracy and the new bourgeois.